Facing a new lockdown, extend the bubble to two adult families?

How would you define life-threatening? It's actually more life-threatening than many illnesses.

Would you just leave nature to take its course? If you did, hundreds of thousands of people would die unnecessarily. Is that what you want?

vegansrock

It was a group of home educators who objected to being registered a few years ago , which led to attempts to register all children not in school being dropped. So I guess they’ve only themselves to blame. They don’t want the restrictions of being in school, so can’t gather together in their own unregulated groups. If there’s a whole group of home schooled children then they’re not all at home are they? It’s sort of like a school. ..

Yes, as I said, it's a grey area. I guess it depends if a jobsworth wanted to make a fuss.

Personally, I'd want to ensure social distancing - better than happens in schools.

There are issues with these sort of groups, where unregulated teachers without a DBS are cramming loads of children round a kitchen table and calling themselves a tuition business.

Really? News to me. We have been in a bubble with my daughter and her partner. Thought that was absolutely acceptable. Slap my wrists. Oh well!

I'm just amazed that so many people are hell bent on treating the rules/guidelines as a pic'n'mix.

Others seem to be in denial.

With 31,453,355 confirmed cases worldwide (a small proportion of the real figure) and 968,251 deaths (again underestimated) when will they realise that we're in the middle of a pandemic?

Hetty58

I'm just amazed that so many people are hell bent on treating the rules/guidelines as a pic'n'mix.

Others seem to be in denial.

With 31,453,355 confirmed cases worldwide (a small proportion of the real figure) and 968,251 deaths (again underestimated) when will they realise that we're in the middle of a pandemic?

I agree with you Hetty. I sometimes think people imagine themselves in a court of law, pleading for mitigation from the judge before sentencing. The virus doesn't know if people are meeting others for worthy reasons or just to have a laugh together.

The "rule of six" is arbitrary, but there has to be a cut off somewhere. Incidentally, the "eat five portions of fruit and veg" mantra is also arbitrary but people remember it.

The statistics show that most transmission takes place in the home, either between household members or from visiting others or receiving visitors. The government is trying to minimise households' mixing and the "rule of six" seems a reasonable way to do that. If anybody can think of a better way to minimise the number of contacts people have, maybe they should write to their MP.

growstuff

How would you define life-threatening? It's actually more life-threatening than many illnesses.

Would you just leave nature to take its course? If you did, hundreds of thousands of people would die unnecessarily. Is that what you want?

Cancer, approx 450 daily, Heart Attacks, approx 460 daily. Alzheimers - one if the highest killers of the elderly and Suicide one of the highest killers of the young. These and others - and do not forget flu and pneumonia all kill far more each day, every day, every year than Corona Virus.

Do we get daily figures on any of these broadcast? No...because they are always there. Death is not something that is new, it has not been invented by this latest virus.

Suicides rates are rising dreadfully, due to the severe problems caused by domestic and financial problems being caused by the current situation - that is mainly killing the younger generation.

Live always ends in death........ Something is going to kill us all of at some point.